Reporter:Crucifixion actual event?

A reporter last Wed. evening did a remote telecast on "The Passion" at a local theatre. In her report she was questioned by the anchor about the amount of violence in the film and if it was appropriate.

She responded by saying that since the film portrays an actual event, then the display of violance was appropriate.

I scared my poor wife as I jumped off the bed screaming at the tv. "Actual event!" "Actual Event!!!" I couldn't believe what I had just heard!

This subject has been debated amongst philosophers, historians, theologians, atheists--you name it for hundreds if not a thousand or more years!

However, channel 9 here in little Springfield seems to have found the proof that everyone has missed all of these years.

I was upset because apparently, accuracy in journalism doesn't apply when you live in a small city that has a very large, fundamental Christian population.

Shouldn't the reporter have said: "Many people BELIEVE that the film portrays and actual event...."

What happened to fair and unbiased reporting?

*rolls eyes*

Actually, using the same criteria to validate ancient figures, there is little debate among scholars that Jesus lived, was a historical figure and was crucified. Even the ultra left "Jesus seminar" believe in that Jesus existed and was executed.

Are you referring to religious and/or Christian scholars?

There is and always has been a HUGE debate as to the historical validity of Jesus and even the origins and accuracy of the New Testament writings.

paradigmer: Are you referring to religious and/or Christian scholars?

me: of course. No serious authority of Christian history questions his life or death. Of course some "expert" like oh say, "Time Magazine" or some othe popular culture NON authority may have published some juvenile challenges to the authenticity of the historical Jesus. But again, no serious expert/authority doubts he lived and died as a historical figure. Maybe Ceasar didn't exist, or Attila the Hun, or maybe Lincoln and Washington didn't exist. Heck, maybe FDR is a myth!

para: There is and always has been a HUGE debate as to the historical validity of Jesus and even the origins and accuracy of the New Testament writings.

me: No, there has not been "huge" debate. There is small vocal contingent of fringe conspiracy theorist who believe Jesus didn't exist.

There is more debate concerning the accuracy and origins of the NT. There is not much debate about whether Jesus actually lived, died and was crucified. I think you would have to ignore all of the contemporary non biblical sources and the impact of referenced figures of history who spoke of Him just a generation or two after his death.

I don't know about you guys but I routinely die for beliefs and events that I know never really happened. This is really just pathetic. You can't de-validify something so you pretend it never happened. Grow up.

"paradigmer is a loser who bitched about the passion movie for 2 days on the OG"

Incorrect. I posted my opinon and beliefs and subsequently supported them with a structured argument.

"bitched"??? You use this language on the Holyground?

"claiming that he was a former seminary student"

No claims--just facts (a concept which you apparently are not familiar with) I have already posted the names of both schools I attended--both bible college and seminary.

"turns out he is a lying COWARD after all "

Really. Please enlighten everyone about the lies I've told. Here ya go. Here's your chance. Please tell us all.

"who doesn't have the guts to state his beliefs"

Not true at all.

more for later...gotta go


Taken from the welcome page.

"Our purpose here is not to prove or deny the existence of God or any other deity."

Sorry Rev. Based on that criteria, my thread was inappropriate and I apologize. The thread was NOT a troll attempt, and I didn't realize what the full purpose of this forum was for. I honestly had not read the welcome page before.

Also taken from the welcome page:

"I am hoping this will not be a place for nastiness and insults..."

It looks like some others may need to read the welcome page as well...

"But again, no serious expert/authority doubts he lived and died as a historical figure. Maybe Ceasar didn't exist, or Attila the Hun, or maybe Lincoln and Washington didn't exist. Heck, maybe FDR is a myth! "

this is poor logic, but i understand your point

there are 'serious' experts and authorities who have doubted the existance of jesus...

the reason no one doubts any of the others that you mentioned is that they were figures with many sources 'proving' their existance, not just one

"There is more debate concerning the accuracy and origins of the NT. There is not much debate about whether Jesus actually lived, died and was crucified. I think you would have to ignore all of the contemporary non biblical sources and the impact of referenced figures of history who spoke of Him just a generation or two after his death. "

i agree, but has there been any supporting evidence about execution? thanks

Yep. There is actually external sources for Jesus aside from the bible as well as other "proofs". How valid these are as proofs...well, that probably depends on how much time people put into investigating them, the credibility they give the various sources etc.

what are they

Tacitus, Josephus, Thallus, Pliny, Lucian, Suetonius, Mara bar Serapion, the Talmud.

In addition to these external writers there are of course a plethora of Christian writers with Paul writing as early as 30 years after the death of Jesus. Most of all the biblical authors were done composing their NT letters by 80 A.D. (Revelation by John being the last). That means just 50 years after the death of Jesus.

thanks for the list...though i must say that some of those historians used eachother as sources and are a bit removed from jesus' time...also, with josephus, the debate over the authenticity of that statement has been in question for a long time

i will look into the rest later though

I think there is some debate with interpolation on Josephus' account. I don't know that it's entirely provable in terms of what is or isn't. Certainly that he existed and was executed is pretty much accepted.